Id like to hear what people say before I put my evidence forward........what I will state first though (so you can kinda see where my loyalyts lie) is that ALL of the planets in our solar system are warming up.

So if anybody has any Evidence to support it (that we are the cause of planetary change) id like them to post it please

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

(07-11-2011 05:48 AM)bemore Wrote: So if anybody has any Evidence to support it

bemore, a few links pro and con won't help you here. On the internet you will find 'evidence' for anything and its exact opposite in abundance. Many of them planted on purpose. You, as an avid 'conspiracy-theorist', should know that.

I recommended some books to you to read, in the past, on the subject.

Do a serious research to find the facts.

Why not start with "Climate Wars" by Gwynne Dyer. He has done extensive research for years, traveled around the world, interviewed dozens of key scientists in the area. He is a historian with a very high reputation, with no axe to grind, telling it exactly as he sees it. You can find lots of further reading material in his References section.

I'm not a "denier," I just ain't seen what I would call "conclusive evidence of human guilt." And I ain't agreeing with the whack green attack till I do. But you can make up your own mind. You got one.

I'm with houseofcantor on this one. I realize that humans have destroyed a lot of things on Earth, we are killing nature, but as far as global warming is concerned, there are too many theories to put a finger on human influence alone. The sun flares, cosmic radiation, volcano eruptions, normal climate changes, there can be all sorts of non-human reasons. Still waiting for something that will convince me otherwise.

No matter are we or are we not responsible for global warming, we still need to be more careful about pollution if we want to live on this planet for a while...

I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.-Hunter S. Thompson

Another excellent book to read on the subject is "Keeping Our Cool" by Andrew Weaver -- Canadian scientist and university professor. He has a whole chapter debunking claims by the denial-industry (blaming sun-spot activities, etc).

He provides plenty of convincing (for me) scientific and statistical evidence in the "Human Footprint" chapter about our human contribution.

I have read far too much to think that global warming or climate change as they call it now (literally because some people weren't understanding wha was happening and writing it off every winter when it still got cold) to think that it's not a partially man made problem and at its base level that it IS a problem. Like Zatamon said the Internet is not the place you typically want to spend your time on this one as there is far too much misinformation plaguing the web. Read books. Preferably the ones by scientists.

I also have a question one I have asked my anti climate change brother in law. Even if global warming isn't true, what would it hurt to try and clean up our act anyways? Fix the damage we have done? Why is this even an issue? As a species are we that selfish and obsessed with profits that we will allow ourselves to completely destroy our own home?

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison

(07-11-2011 07:51 AM)lucradis Wrote: I have read far too much to think that global warming or climate change as they call it now (literally because some people weren't understanding wha was happening and writing it off every winter when it still got cold) to think that it's not a partially man made problem and at its base level that it IS a problem. Like Zatamon said the Internet is not the place you typically want to spend your time on this one as there is far too much misinformation plaguing the web. Read books. Preferably the ones by scientists.

I also have a question one I have asked my anti climate change brother in law. Even if global warming isn't true, what would it hurt to try and clean up our act anyways? Fix the damage we have done? Why is this even an issue? As a species are we that selfish and obsessed with profits that we will allow ourselves to completely destroy our own home?

Yeah, pretty much.

My links are A fucking plus. You can check 'em if you disagree. First book I read on the subject was by Kary Mullis. Used to be a Nobel laureate - now mostly known as a crank, because of nonsense like Global Warming.

I'm not disagreeing with you - I'm disagreeing with - fix the planet. We suck at "fixing" stuff. Ever look into the history of Yellowstone? I'm thinking that's the place where "we" decided we didn't want no Indians hunting our all-natural deer - and it was a fucking disaster.

First time in human history, Geo-Engineering now is an actual, multi-billion dollar Project.

Read the newest on Gwynne Dyer's blog.

He starts off by:

Quote:Scientists who are working on various concepts for “geo-engineering” the climate are almost comically eager to stress that they are not trying to come up with a substitute for reducing carbon dioxide emissions, the main cause of manmade global warming. They are just researching backup systems that we might need if the reductions don’t happen fast enough.

(my emphasis)

and then goes on:

Quote:That is the goal of a three-year project called Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (Spice), which is being supported by the universities of Bristol, Cambridge, Edinburgh and Oxford.

and, finally:

Quote:The scientists who are investigating geo-engineering are not reckless. They are actually the cautious ones, who want to have some fall-back plan available in case all the promises of future emissions cuts do not come true, just like all the past promises of emissions cuts failed to come true. We will get our emissions down eventually, no doubt, but it would be nice not to have a climate catastrophe in the meantime.

It is worth reading the whole piece.

(07-11-2011 06:58 AM)Filox Wrote: Still waiting for something that will convince me otherwise.

Waiting is not enough any more, Filox. You have to meet the information half way. That means reading books written by responsible, world-class scientists.

Is man having an impact on climate? Almost certainly yes. CO2 plays a role in global temperatures when it is released in large amounts over short periods of time. At other points during Earth's past we have probably had 10x the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere but temperatures that were probably very similar to temperatures today (like the early Permian). The point is not really the absolute amount of CO2 but the rate at which it is entering the atmosphere. This appears to be producing a temperature increase that causes a positive feedback loop to begin. This means higher temperatures -> less ice = lower albedo -> warmer temperature -> methane clathrate destablaization -> temperature increase and then the methane breaks down into even more CO2 ->temperature increase. The positive feedback loop will continue to run no matter what we do now, it always has.

So, are we the sole cause? No. Are we contributing? Most likely. And as Lucradis pointed out, we should be reducing pollution because it is harmful to life, not because we want to "reverse" global warming. That is not possible. We have to adapt to changing climates. Currently grow cotton in a dry climate (cotton requires massive amounts of water)? Grow a different plant that uses less water! Currently grow fruits and vegetables in an area that is getting colder and is now susceptible to more frosts later in the growing season, killing your crop? Stop growing fruits and vegetables and grow something else.

The important points are:
1) to adapt to the changing climate because it will continue to change
2) reduce pollution because we have seen higher rates of asthma and other illnesses that are associated with air, water and soil quality
3) stop trying to fix it. Instead, allow nature the time to repair itself. Far to often projects like reef restoration do more damage than good. We go in and try to restore the reef to some level that we deem valuable (despite the fact that we may be restoring it to a previously altered state. For instance natural, healthy reefs that are undisturbed by man have a lot of sharks. I have never seen someone want to restore a reef so as to bring back sharks, that makes snorkling a bit more dangerous). If we simply reduce our trash and pollution output, build smarter building in smarter areas and leave nature alone to repair itself, in a few thousand years it may be able to recover a portion of what has been damaged.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley